This is a critique of how designers deal with contending histories and multiple presents in design to speculate about socio-technical futures. The paper unpacks how embedded definitions and assumptions of temporality in current design tools contribute to coloniality in designed futures. As design practice becomes implicated in how oppression extends from physical systems to global digital platforms, our critique rejects the notion that it is only AI that needs fixing and it dissects the Futures Cone used in speculative design to make these issues visible. As an alternative, we offer a hauntological vocabulary to aid designers in reorienting their speculative tools and accommodating pluriversality in anticipatory futures. To illustrate the benefits of the proposed metaphors, we highlight examples of coloniality in digital spaces and emphasize the failure of speculative design to decolonize future imaginaries. Using points of reference from hauntology, those that engage with uncertain states of lingering or spectrality, and notions of nostalgia, absence, and anticipation, this paper contributes to rethinking the role that design tools play in colonizing future imaginaries, especially those pertaining to potentially disruptive technologies.
There has probably never been such an intense debate about the layout of the countryside as the one that is currently raging. There are serious concerns about the landscape, which is being rapidly transformed by urbanization and everything associated with this process, and not only in the Netherlands but also far beyond its borders. Everyone has something to say in this society-wide debate, from local to national governments, from environmental factions to the road-user's lobby, and from those who are professionally involved to concerned private parties. In many cases it is a battle between idealized images and economic models, between agricultural reality and urban park landscapes, between ecological concerns and mobility. This issue of OASE explores the potential significance of architectonic design for transformation processes on the regional scale. Besides considering the instruments that are available to the designer to fulfil this task, the authors also consider how the design can exercise a 'positive' influence on such processes. The various contributions shed light on the potential significance of territory in contemporary design practice and offer critical reflection on the topical discourse that has evolved over recent years.
In On the Mode of Existence of Technical Objects (1958), French philosopher Gilbert Simondon noticed that humans were losing their reciprocal connection with technology. We push buttons without understanding what’s happening ‘inside’ the machine – whether it’s a light switch or a smartphone. ‘For Simondon, restoring this mutual relationship would be a means for developing a technological culture’, says computer scientist and philosopher Yuk Hui. Revealing the different structures of a technology, which are ‘inside’ the machine, can reduce technical alienation. ‘An individual technical object can’t exist without a wider associated milieu’, states Hui. Thus, we need to look at its mechanisms, infrastructures and physical manifestations.
MULTIFILE